Less than half of military votes overseas counted

[Melissa G]

A very sad commentary on how much the votes of those who have been put
in harm's way are being valued.
Regards,
Melissa Gonzales

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=49006

Less than half of military votes overseas counted
Election commission: 57,000 ballots were cast in '06
By Leo Shane III, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Tuesday, September 25, 2007

WASHINGTON - Overseas military voters had less than half of their
votes counted in last year's congressional elections, according to
data released by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission on Monday.

"One thing is clear: At every level of government, we need to do a
better job," said Donetta Davidson, chair of the commission. "We must
make sure all eligible voters are getting their opportunities."

The figures, released at the commission's annual conference on ways to
improve and troubleshoot the absentee voting process, showed that only
about 992,000 of the nearly 6 million eligible overseas citizens
requested ballots for the 2006 general election.

That included about 119,000 military personnel stationed outside the
United States. Of those, only about 57,000 - less than 48 percent -
had their votes successfully cast or counted.

EAC officials said that's roughly the same percentage that were
counted for expatriates and domestic military filing absentee ballots.
The major failures were on the ballot delivery side, with about 72
percent of those who failed to vote never receiving any of their
requested election materials.

Still, the commission also saw positive news for overseas military.

In a survey of absentee voters from four states - South Carolina,
Florida, Illinois and Montana - researchers found that overseas
military were nearly three times as likely to attempt to vote as their
overseas civilian counterparts. And nearly 90 percent of those who
made it through the system were pleased how the voting process worked.

Q2 Data & Research senior partner Bruce Cain, who led the work on that
survey, said overseas voters also are anxious to embrace new
technology to make the absentee voting system easier to follow and
more efficient.

Currently only eight states allow transmitting a final election
ballot, but others offer varying levels of e-mail assistance and fax
submission offerings.

"The numbers of [electronic voting options] are still small, but the
satisfaction level with them is very high," he said.

And EAC officials said local election officials they surveyed said
they're anxious to offer more assistance to overseas voters,
especially military serving in combat zones.

Still, often those goals are constrained by the small budgets and
small staff of the offices involved. Kimball Brace, president of
Election Data Services, said 1,778 local election offices nationwide
serve less than 1,000 voters, and often face more difficulty quickly
responding to overseas requests.

[Arlene Montemarano]

A while go I read that all voting done by service people is under the control of the Defense Department, at that time Rumsfeld.

I found that unsettling.

[Michael Green]

Melissa Gonzales writes, "A very sad commentary on how much the votes of those who have been put in harm's way are being valued."  Pew write EI supporting the vote for the military, and Nancy Tobi advises that Pew Trust took to its bed former EAC chair Ray Martinez who is pushing a variety of fraud-infested voting options.

 

COMMENT:  I am sure that Melissa means well, but I hope that next time she thinks more carefully before letting her fingers do the walking.  First, the article's facts do not support its headline "Less than half of military votes overseas counted."  All it says is that more than half of the military who applied for voting forms did not have  thier votes ultimately counted.  Some may not have voted, or voted timely, but most did not receiver their requested voting materials.  There is no suggestion of suppression of the military vote, quite the contrary.

 

Gore refused to fight the decision to count military votes not sent timely because he feared that a victory of those terms would undermine his legitimacy as president.  The Republicans insisted on counting such votes b/c they have a lock on the military vote, which is predominantly Republican, the part of the religious right -- theocons and Dominionist Reconstructionists who want a theocratic state and threaten overt fascist rule.  The "military" is not simply a bunch of sweet wayward youth put in harms way per MG's idealization.  It is a volunteer corps engaged in a colonial war of occupation against an innocent civilian population; its officer corps is openly, proudly, and defiantly evangelical Christian and radically conservative Catholic.  Much of it, especially at the higher echelons, considers itself inspired by a god-given right for total world conquest and dominion.  I suggest that Melissa's worries about helping these people vote is misplaced and I suggest that she find some other way of wrapping our cause (EI/VR/CR) with the flag.

 

So, who do we hear from but Pew itself, "This event, held at Pew's Washington, D.C. office, focuses on the obstacles faced by American military and civilian voters overseas."  Again, save your hanky and open your history books.

 

Despite the Rockefeller family's genocide in the Brazilian Amazon in its quest for oil, they were considered too soft and "liberal" by many.

 

Nelson Rockefeller's speech to the Republican convention was riveting. ...Nelson [Rockefeller] knew, as did much of this nation, that Barry Goldwater had refused to disavow support from the ultrarightist John Birch Society.  He also knew, as most Americans did not, that Goldwater and the Birth Society were both heavily funded by J. Howard Pew, owner of one of the Standard Oil's major rivals, the Sun Oil Company.  (Gerard Colby, Thy Will Be Done: Nelson Rockefeller and Evangelism in the Age of Oil, 1995, pp. 453-454)

Ferdinand Lundberg,  60 Families, 1937 & 1938, writes:

The "identities" of the "New Deal" opponents were an important source of strength to the Democratic ticket, for they comprised all the heavily publicized clans whose selfish activities have tormented the American people for many years.

A list of contributors follows.  The largest ($855,000) was from the Du Ponts who openly supported Hitler and wrote virulent tracts on blood inferiority.  Next largest was "the Pew family" of Sun Oil at $514,000, followed by the Rockefellers at $187,000.  The "benign" mission of the Republicans since 1980 has been to dismantle the New Deal.

 

In the 1930s, the Pews were more aggressive still.  They were part of a little known and less understood attempt to topple the US government by military force against FDR.  In 1933-1934 they tried to recruit retired General Smedley Butler to lead angry and starving veterans against the state so that FDR could be killed, the coup crushed by MacArthur, and the pliable military dictator of the plotters' choice put in his place.  (Jules Archer, The Plot to Seize the White House, 1975; look up "Pew" in index.)  MacArhur went on to defy Truman by attempting to provoke WWIII with China and the USSR (I. F. Stone,  The Hidden History of the Korean War, 1952).

 

The coup plotters against FDR had created the Liberty League as a "legitimate" front for their covert efforts.  After Butler exposed the coup effort, the Pews and their right-wing brethren openly still supported other fascist efforts. 

Another fascist organization financed by Liberty League members was the Sentinels of the Republic.  The National Chairman of the Sentinels was Raymond Pitcairn, President of the Pitcairns company [which contributed] more than $100,000.  Other large contributors were Atwater Kent, President of the Atwater Kent Manufacturing Company; Horatio Lloyd, banker and Morgan partner; J. Howard Pew, President of the Sun Oil Company; and Bernard Kroger, banker and grocery tycoon.

 

Like official Nazi propaganda, the literature disseminated by the Sentinels of the Republic stressed "the Jewish-Communist" menaces of the New Deal.  In 1936 the Senate Black Committee investigating lobbying activities made public certain revealing correspondence found in he files of the Sentinels.  The correspondence consisted of an exchange of letters between Alexander Lincoln, the Boston investment banker who was President of the Sentinels, and W. Cleveland Runon of Plainfield, NJ.  Runyon's first letter to Lincoln excoriated "the Jewish brigade Roosevelt took to Washington" and went on to say:

The fight for Western Christian civilization can be won; but only if we recognize that the enemy is world-wide and that it is Jewish in origin.  All we need here is money.  ...The time is getting short.  Can you not do something?

To which the president of the Sentinels, Lincoln, replied:

I am doing what I can as an officer of the Sentinels.  I think as you can say, that the Jewish threat is a real one.  My hope is in the election next autumn, and I believe that our real opportunity lies in accomplishing the defeat of Roosevelt.

Runyon then wrote back:

The people are crying for leadership and we are not getting it.  Our leaders are asleep.  The Sentinels should really lead on the outstanding issue.  The old-line Americans of $1,000 a year want a Hitler.  (Albert E. Kahn, High Treason, The Plot Against the People, 1950, pp. 195-196).

There are better places for your excellent energy than working towards making sure that every one of the US's ignorant brainwashed, militarized and heavily Xtn fascist soldiers have his and her vote brought to the box timely and counted.  The reason the military does not worry about collecting all those votes is that they know they don't need to votes to win the election.

 

Regards,

 

Michael Green

[Nancy Tobi]

wow. nice bit of research Michael. I am beginning to think the only true White Hats are We the People.

[Melissa G]

Thank you for your concern about where I put my time and energy, as
well as your confidence about my good intentions.
Not being in love with the slow sound of my own keystrokes, I am
essentially a re poster of news articles which I find interesting.

You might care to notice that the headline I posted was the 'actual
headline' of the news article, not my own invention.

My only personal commentary ..

"A very sad commentary on how much the votes of those who have been

put in harm's way are being valued." is something that I could defend
on numerous fronts, not the least of which is the proprietary
machinery these votes are sometimes processed on, ballot delivery,
success rate of voting vs. inclination, small budgets, etc. All noted
in the article.

We strongly disagree about the folks in the military but that is off
topic for this discussion. Feel free to email me or call if you want
to hear those points.

Your comment...

"There are better places for your excellent energy than working
towards making sure that every one of the US's ignorant brainwashed,
militarized and heavily Xtn fascist soldiers have his and her vote
brought to the box timely and counted. The reason the military does
not worry about collecting all those votes is that they know they
don't need to votes to win the election. "

I find myself restraining my gag response.This reeks of a different
flavor of authoritarian attitude of 'whose votes should be counted',
that I am still inclined to fight as undermining democracy. It is
equally as offensive to me as the group of folks who you did such a
fine job of documenting.

I have a signature line on another site...

Register ALL the People! Count ALL the Votes! Make the process
Transparent and Verifiable! And do it NOW!

It's a strategy that works for me and what I'll continue to work
towards.
Regards,
Melissa Gonzales

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -